St Margaret Clitherow Catholic Primary School Ofsted Report

Full report

In accordance with section 44(1) of the Education Act 2005, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires special measures because it is failing to give its pupils an acceptable standard of education and the persons responsible for leading, managing or governing the school are not demonstrating the capacity to secure the necessary improvement in the school.

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management by:
  • securing leadership capacity in the school so that leaders are not overly reliant on external support
  • establishing clear systems for the performance management of staff so that teachers receive guidance and support to improve the quality of their teaching and to raise standards
  • implementing a consistent and accurate system for assessing and tracking pupils’ learning
  • ensuring that governors understand the impact teaching has on pupils’ progress and check more rigorously on the school’s performance, holding leaders fully to account for the progress of all pupils, including those who are disadvantaged
  • developing clear lines of communication with parents
  • making sure that provision in the early years meets the needs of the children.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment quickly by ensuring that teachers:
  • raise expectations of what all groups of pupils can achieve and improve rates of pupils’ progress
  • accurately understand what pupils can and cannot do and use this knowledge to eradicate any gaps in learning
  • increase their subject knowledge, especially about writing, so that they can plan the next steps in pupils’ learning effectively, particularly for the most able pupils and those who have special educational needs
• Improve the personal development, behaviour and welfare of pupils by:
  • ensuring that rates of attendance improve for all groups of pupils
  • developing pupils’ understanding of bullying and knowledge of how to keep themselves safe.
• Improve the early years provision by ensuring that:
  • the learning environment, both indoors and outdoors, is stimulating and supports children’s explorations and development of their imagination
  • assessment is improved by using it effectively to ensure that planned learning and provision builds on what children know, can do and understand, particularly in writing for boys and the most able children. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium should be undertaken in order to assess how to improve this aspect of leadership and management.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Leadership over time has been ineffective. Current leadership is in disarray. Despite good intentions, the capacity of leaders currently in the school is insufficient to improve teaching and outcomes quickly enough. The school’s failings are widespread. There have been too few leaders with the experience or time necessary to have a positive impact.
• The information leaders provide about pupils’ achievements is inaccurate in some year groups. In addition, until very recently, senior leaders have not systematically monitored and evaluated the progress of different groups of pupils. Underachievement goes unchecked.
• Over time, leaders, including governors, have not shown enough urgency in improving the quality of teaching in the school. Leaders have provided little professional development to teachers. Until recently, leaders have not identified teaching that is not good enough. Consequently, leaders have not provided staff with the appropriate training and support to improve their classroom practice rapidly. Upheaval in staffing has contributed to the inadequate quality of teaching, learning and assessment.
• Leaders have failed to identify the trends and patterns of absence thoroughly. Reports to governors have been vague. As a result, pupils’ poor attendance has gone unquestioned until very recently.
• The school does not provide equality of provision for pupils. This is seen in the differences in progress and attainment between disadvantaged pupils and other groups of pupils in the school. Similarly, there is inequality in provision between subjects and year groups. For example, fewer pupils achieve the expected outcomes in writing than in reading. Pupils in some year groups, such as Years 2 and 3, are receiving teaching which is tackling previous underachievement. However, instability in staffing is leading to further underachievement.
• Leaders have not used the pupil premium funding effectively. Leaders’ reports on the effectiveness of pupil premium have contained inaccuracies that have not been challenged by governors. Strategies to support disadvantaged pupils have not been embedded in teaching. Catch-up and booster sessions have had limited impact on pupils’ progress. This is primarily because of two factors: firstly, staff absence and the resulting irregularity with which the sessions take place; secondly, the lack of clear assessment procedures means that there is no clarity on what support pupils need.
• Upheaval in staffing and a change in roles has had a negative impact on the leadership of provision for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Reviews take place too infrequently for teachers to act quickly to change things that are not working. Where external agencies are slow to provide information, the leader has little capacity to follow up.
• The leadership of mathematics has been stronger than in other subject areas. The calculations and assessment policy in this subject has supported improving teachers’ subject knowledge. Consequently, teachers have a better understanding of expectations in this subject than in writing, for example. However, leaders have rightly identified that pupils’ progress in mathematics, in particular that of the most able, is an area for improvement.
• Timetables and pupils’ books show that pupils have a varied diet of subjects. Although the curriculum is broad and balanced, learning is not well developed in all subjects. Writing and opportunities to use mathematics are not well developed across subjects.
• The Plymouth Catholic and Anglican Schools Trust (CAST) has not acted quickly enough to support school improvement at St Margaret Clitherow. More recently, and in particular since January 2017, support has been intensive. Temporary leaders have valued this support. However, there is limited evidence of impact of this support beyond compliance with safeguarding and the formation of a new local governing body.
• A part-time interim headteacher joined the school this week. She has already gained a good understanding of the school’s weaknesses from her scrutiny of lessons and pupils’ work. However, she has had no time to implement changes.
• Less than a quarter of the respondents to the parent questionnaire, Parent View, would recommend the school. Leaders acknowledge that poor communication, particularly around staff absence, has led to dissatisfaction among many parents.
• Leaders’ use of additional sport and physical education funding has given pupils access to a good range of sporting activities and some expert coaching. Many pupils benefit from a range of extra-curricular out-of-hours activities such as football and outdoor learning. Further activities in school time, such as climbing, have inspired pupils to join clubs out of school.
• Leaders have identified opportunities to develop pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural education across the curriculum, and some of these have been put into good effect. For example, many pupils contribute thoughtful prayers in assemblies. The school promotes an understanding of religions other than the Catholic faith. Consequently, pupils have an awareness of British values and understand what it means to be part of a caring community.
• The acting headteacher has rallied staff morale. She has motivated staff to work together to overcome the effects of staff absence in a period of uncertainty.
• It is recommended that leaders do not seek to appoint newly qualified teachers.

Governance of the school

• Until very recently, the directors of CAST have not supported the school effectively. Governors who were in place before this year say that support was inadequate.
• Governors have been unsuccessful in their attempts to challenge leaders. They accept responsibility and make no excuses. They have sought advice from CAST and have acted on the guidance. A new governing body was established this year. CAST has recently carried out a governance review. Governors are working diligently on areas needing improvement but have had little time to make an impact.
• The governing body has not been effective in driving improvements. Governors do not have a clear enough picture of the quality of teaching and the impact it has on pupils’ progress. New governors acknowledge that recent CAST training in checking the school’s performance in relation to national schools data has been helpful. They now have an understanding of end of key stage outcomes in 2016. However, they do not have a clear enough understanding of pupils’ progress in all year groups in the school.
• Historically, governors have had an over-inflated view of the school’s performance because the information they have received from senior leaders has focused on attainment and not progress.
• Governors have not ensured that additional funding such as the pupil premium is used well. Inaccuracies in reporting have gone unnoticed. There has been little evaluation of the impact of strategies. Where leaders have attempted to review impact, outcomes are not based on accurate information about pupil outcomes.
• Governors have engaged well in recent CAST training. Consequently, they are beginning to ask more challenging questions of leaders and are gaining a better understanding of the school’s work.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Recent improvements to safeguarding are ensuring that the culture of safeguarding is improving. Pupils are confident to share any concerns they may have. They trust adults in school. In particular, they feel that staff who run ‘the blue room’ help them to overcome any problems they face.
• Leaders keep accurate records that enable them to keep a close eye on any pupil that may be at risk of harm. In addition, mealtime and teaching assistants recognised that there were too many accidents at lunchtimes. They approached leaders and together implemented changes, including adjustments to lunchtimes. As a result, the number of incidents and injuries has reduced.
• Adults and volunteers who work in the school know their duties well because leaders have ensured that staff receive up-to-date training. For example, adults know how to spot signs of abuse and know who to go to if they have concerns.
• Some aspects around the administration of safeguarding documentation are not well organised. For example, there are some inconsistencies in the recording of bullying and behaviour incidents. Records show that incidents do not go unnoticed. However, there is sometimes a lack of clarity around teachers’ and leaders’ actions and resulting communication with parents.
• Inspection activities and the CAST safeguarding audit both identified that until recently, leaders did not ensure that proper checks were carried out on adults at the recruitment stage. For example, where references had not been provided, this was not followed up. However, current leaders have been vigilant in following safeguarding protocols when appointing recently. Because of their vigilance, recent recruitment procedures demonstrate best practice.
• The school has acted quickly to respond to the recommendations of the CAST’s comprehensive safeguarding audit this term. All areas of weakness have now been actioned. Consequently, safeguarding procedures are compliant with legislation.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• There are key weaknesses in the quality of teaching, learning and assessment.
• There are significant inconsistencies in the quality of teaching across year groups and subjects. Too many teachers do not take account of what pupils already know and can do when planning learning. As a result, the work teachers set is too hard for some and too easy for others. This is exacerbated by the instability of staffing, particularly in upper key stage 2.
• Assessment procedures in the school are weak. Some of the school’s information is unreliable. Therefore, teachers know too little about pupils’ starting points to provide them with the challenge and support they need to make good progress.
• As a result of temporary teachers, particularly in upper key stage 2, inconsistencies in approach and a lack of knowledge of pupils’ prior attainment has severely disrupted pupils’ learning.
• In some classes, not just where there are temporary staff, teachers’ strategies for behaviour management are weak. Consequently, pupils’ learning is interrupted. Pupils do not make the progress of which they are capable.
• The teaching of writing is ineffective. Teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve are typically too low. Teachers do not challenge pupils to use a variety of sentence constructions and too readily accept poor presentation and careless errors. Many teachers do not give pupils sufficient opportunities to practise and develop their writing skills across a broad range of subjects.
• Although there have been improvements in the teaching of phonics, there is little evidence that this this has had a positive impact on the quality of pupils’ writing. There have been recent improvements in the quality of handwriting and spelling as a result of moderation of work within CAST schools. However, this improvement is not evident across all year groups.
• While the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is inadequate overall, there are pockets of stronger practice. For example, teaching in Years 2 and 3 is helping to address previous underachievement. Similarly, some teaching assistant support is effective in supporting pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, or those who need additional support with their behaviour. This support is enabling these pupils to engage more readily in learning. However, this practice is not widespread because of staffing issues.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Pupils feel safe in the school and understand what it means to feel and be safe. They report that adults care for them and that the school is secure at all times. However, there are occasions when incidents such as fighting can take place. While pupils do not feel they are unsafe at these times, because teachers’ ‘deal with it’, pupils feel uncomfortable. Records show that incidents of poor behaviour have reduced since January because of leaders’ increased vigilance and expectations.
• Pupils who spoke to the inspector were unable to describe what constitutes bullying and the difference between bullying and ‘falling out with friends’. They said that bullying happens sometimes but that teachers ‘sort it’. Some parents had concerns about their child’s safety in school. Only 16% of the parents who responded to the online questionnaire, Parent View, agreed that the school dealt with bullying well. Parents spoken to by the inspector on day 2 were far more positive about the school’s work. However, leaders recognise that there is more to do in this aspect of the school’s work.
• Although planned curriculum activities ensure that pupils develop an understanding of different points of view and what it is to be a responsible citizen, a few pupils struggle to follow these values in words and deeds. However, for the majority of pupils, their spiritual, moral, social and cultural education equips them to be caring and responsible citizens in society.
• Leaders record behaviour and bullying incidents and report serious cases to governors. However, the recording of incidents and actions is not consistent. Nor are the sanctions for pupils who have caused behaviour incidents always effective. A lack of capacity in leadership has resulted in leaders having to be reactive and not proactive in dealing with misdemeanours. Some pupils continue to misbehave.
• The weakest teaching does not engage or challenge pupils well enough. As a result, pupils lose interest, their concentration wanes, and a few begin to disrupt others’ learning. Conversely, where teaching is strong, pupils show high levels of motivation and work hard. This variability is evident in whether or not pupils show a pride in the presentation and accuracy of their work.
• The school’s work to teach pupils to be safe needs strengthening. Pupils say that school is a safe place and that they are happy. However, they have a limited understanding of internet safety.
• Pupils are highly complimentary about the school’s ‘blue room’. This is a space where pupils can go for a quiet moment to reflect and a space where they can receive emotional support from well-qualified and skilled staff.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• The very recent work of the acting headteacher has led to some small steps of improvement for overall attendance. However, it is still below the national average. Leaders fail to analyse the trends and patterns of absence thoroughly. They do not act swiftly enough to stem the decline in attendance of those pupils who are persistently absent. In particular, leaders have failed to halt the decline in the attendance of disadvantaged pupils.
• Pupils largely conduct themselves well around the school. At play and lunchtimes, the majority of pupils play well together. Leaders ensure there is adequate supervision. For some pupils, mainly boys in the older years, play is boisterous. They do not show care in the way they use playground space and can aggravate each other’s misbehaviour. Adults deal with this and are able to restore harmony in the playground.
• Where there has been instability in staffing, some pupils do not demonstrate positive attitudes towards their learning. Where teaching is good, pupils behave well and no learning is disrupted. A few pupils told the inspector that their learning is sometimes interrupted in class by others talking or shouting out. In the school’s own pupil survey information, almost a quarter of the pupils who replied do not think that pupils behave well in their class.
• Teachers do not always challenge poor attitudes to learning. Where there have been inconsistencies in the provision of staff, teaching is weak and teachers do not plan activities to challenge and motivate pupils. This is reflected in weak progress and poorly presented and incomplete work in books, particularly in writing.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• For some time, pupils’ progress in writing has been weak. In 2016, outcomes at the end of the early years and both key stages 1 and 2 show that pupils do not make the progress expected in writing. No pupils made good progress in writing. The work in current pupils’ books shows that standards are typically below those expected for pupils’ ages. The most able pupils are not fulfilling their potential as they are only producing written work which is, at best, typical of the expected standard for their age.
• The attainment and progress for the few disadvantaged pupils shows a mixed picture in the 2016 end of key stage tests. This is in part due to the small numbers involved. However, with the exception of reading, test outcomes show that disadvantaged pupils have made poor progress. Work in books and the school’s own assessment information for current pupils show that disadvantaged pupils make insufficient progress. This reflects the lack of precision with which the pupil premium has been spent and its impact analysed.
• The school’s own data over time and the work of pupils currently in the school show that pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities do not catch up quickly enough. Progress is stronger in reading than in other subjects. This is because established interventions by highly skilled teaching assistants have continued to take place. Despite this strength, other support has been disrupted or discontinued because of staff absence and changes in leadership.
• The most able pupils do not make good progress, particularly in writing and mathematics. For example, in the 2016 Year 6 tests no previously high-attaining pupil went on to achieve the higher standard in writing or mathematics, or in English, grammar, punctuation and spelling. At key stage 1, fewer pupils achieved a high standard in reading than those nationally and no pupil achieved a high standard in writing or mathematics.
• The work in pupils’ topic books shows little progress or development of skills and understanding. Links between subjects are sometimes tenuous and do not develop pupils’ skills. For example, in subjects such as geography, science and history, pupils learn facts but do not deepen their understanding. Similarly, pupils’ artwork is under-developed.
• Pupils’ attainment in phonics declined to below the national average in 2016. This represented poor progress, as a greater proportion of this cohort had achieved well in reading at the end of their foundation stage. This underachievement has been halted.
• Historically a greater proportion of children achieved a good level of development at the end of the early years than those nationally. However, there was a decline in 2016 to below national average standards.

Early years provision Requires improvement

• In 2016, too few children left the early years well prepared for Year 1. This represented a dip in performance from previous years.
• Children’s current progress in the early years requires improvement. Planned activities do not consistently build on what pupils can and cannot do. Consequently, some children could do even better, and particularly in writing.
• Leadership requires improvement. There is not a sharp enough focus on improving provision in order to ensure consistent rates of progress in the early years. For example, despite a re-organisation of the learning environment over a year ago, aspects of the environment still do not support children’s development. For example, the coat pegs have remained at the wrong height for children. Leaders also recognise the limitations of the outdoor area.
• School leaders know that the provision is not as effective as it could be. Although equipment is accessible, the learning environment, both indoors and out, is not stimulating. Activities do not engage children with their learning. There is little for children to explore and develop their imagination. Consequently, there are times when children are not fully engaged in their learning and this slows down the progress they make.
• Leaders do not evaluate the impact of additional funding in the early years.
• In 2016, fewer children met the writing early learning goal than those nationally. The teacher has successfully improved children’s phonic knowledge. However, children’s writing skills, and in particular those of boys, are underdeveloped. Similarly, the most able writers do not receive the challenge and support they need to make good progress. There are insufficient opportunities to support writing within the provision.
• Teaching is effective in developing early reading skills. Children are enthused by the teacher and the good-quality reading materials. Parents are strongly encouraged to play an active part in listening to their child read. This has a positive impact on children’s attitudes and achievement in reading.
• Effective induction arrangements are in place and these ensure that children settle quickly at school. Additional visits and transition meetings take place for children who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. As a result, children are confident and adults gain a good understanding of the child’s needs. However, in some cases, there is a delay in gaining the advice and support needed from external agencies. When this happens, progress slows for these pupils.
• The class teacher has established positive relationships with families. Families share ‘Wow’ moments and complete reading diaries to contribute to the teacher’s assessments of the children’s skills, knowledge and understanding.
• Children integrate well with older pupils in the school, for example through ‘house activities’. Such activities contribute to the children’s personal and social development.
• All staff provide good care and promote supportive relationships with the children. In response, most children behave well and try hard to please adults. The class teacher sets high expectations for children working together and establishes clear routines. Children cooperate well. For example, at the end of a physical education session children readily helped each other to do up shirt buttons and to put jumpers on.
• Safeguarding arrangements are implemented effectively to keep children safe and secure. The teacher conscientiously carries out rigorous risk assessments and encourages staff vigilance at all times. Consequently, the children are free from harm. The teacher’s effective day-to-day management ensures that children are happy, safe, secure and well protected.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 140768 Torbay 10021132 This inspection was carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005. The inspection was also deemed a section 5 inspection under the same Act. Type of school Primary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Academy converter 5 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 140 Appropriate authority Chair Interim headteacher Telephone number Website Email address The trust board Sandy Anderson Finola Gill 01803 851647 www.margaret-clitherow-primary.torbay.sch.uk/ admin@margaret-clitherow-primary.torbay.sch.uk Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• St Margaret Clitherow Primary School is part of the Plymouth Catholic and Anglican Schools Trust. The trust was formed in April 2014, and its work is overseen by a board of directors. The trust is responsible for: one nursery; one first school; 32 primary schools and two secondary schools across seven local authorities in the south-west region.
• When its predecessor school, of the same name, was last inspected by Ofsted in September 2011, St Margaret Clitherow was judged to be a good school.
• The headteacher has been absent from the school since November 2016. During this time a middle leader who was previously the Year 6 teacher has covered leadership duties as ‘acting headteacher’.
• CAST leaders have arranged a part-time interim headteacher to support leaders from Monday 20 February.
• A new governing body was established in January 2017.
• The school meets the current government floor standards, which set the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress in reading, writing and mathematics at the end of Year 6.
• The school is smaller than the average primary school. Numbers on the school roll have dropped from approximately 170 in 2015 to 140 now. There are currently six classes: Reception, Year 1, Year 2, Year 3, a mixed Year 4 and Year 5 and a mixed Year 5 and 6 class.
• Children in the early years (Reception class) attend full-time.
• The proportion of pupils who are supported by the pupil premium is below average.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is above average.
• The school complies with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish.
• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.

Information about this inspection

• The inspector observed pupils’ learning across the school. All lessons were jointly observed. Some lessons were observed jointly with both the acting headteacher and the interim headteacher. Most classes were visited more than once.
• Meetings were held with the CAST area adviser, the acting and interim headteachers and senior staff.
• A telephone conversation took place with a representative of the local authority.
• A meeting took place with three governors and the clerk to the governing body.
• The inspector scrutinised a number of school documents, including the school’s self-evaluation document. Records relating to behaviour and safety, attendance and safeguarding were also reviewed.
• The inspector observed pupils’ behaviour during lessons, play and lunchtimes.
• The inspector conducted a walk around the school with pupils to seek their views of the school and discuss how they feel about their learning and development. The inspector also took account of the school’s own survey of pupils’ views, which was conducted on the afternoon of day 1 of the inspection.
• The inspector looked at work in books together with senior leaders to establish the current quality of pupils’ work and their progress over time. She also listened to pupils read.
• The inspector considered 106 responses to the online survey, Parent View. Inspectors also considered comments provided by parents’ text messages and Facebook comments and spoke to parents during the inspection. The views of staff were also considered through an online survey and at meetings with the inspector during the inspection.

Inspection team

Tracy Hannon, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector